Introduction

By way of background, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
(Code) was enacted with the primary objective to consolidate and
amend the laws relating to reorganisation and insolvency resolution
of corporates, firms and individuals in a time bound manner to
maximise the value of their assets. The genesis of the Code is
rooted in the long-term vision of providing an effective legal
framework for timely resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy, which
would support development of credit markets and encourage
entrepreneurship. As it exists, the Code has dovetailed judicial
and commercial wisdom for the first time. On perusing the entire
scheme of Code, while it is evident that time is of the essence for
the entire insolvency resolution process, it is equally important
that the Code be interpreted with its entire purpose and the
mischief it sought to address in mind.

However, the Code is still at a nascent stage and recent
judicial interpretations have raised more questions than it has
answered with respect to its implementation. This is because the
Principal Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT PB),
seems to have interpolated a wider meaning in certain provisions of
the Code while interpreting them.

Factual Background

Recently, while disposing of two cases on 1 March 2017 against a
common corporate debtor, Ambience Private Limited, (Corporate
Debtor) filed by One Coat Plaster and Shivam Construction Company
(being Company Application No. (I.B.) 07/PB/2017 and Company
Application No. (I.B.) 08/PB/2017 respectively), the NCLT PB was
required to interpret the word 'dispute', the
phrase 'notice of dispute', and deal with the
sanctity of the timeframe envisaged for filing a reply, if at all,
to demand notice by an operational creditor, for the first
time.

Briefly, the Corporate Debtor had issued certain work orders to
One Coat Plaster and Shivam Construction Company (collectively,
Operational Creditors), on various occasions. After some payments
had been made to the Operational Creditors, they alleged that
certain amounts were still due to them by the Corporate Debtor,
i.e. INR 32,60,833 (Indian Rupees Thirty two lakh sixty thousand
eight hundred thirty three) in so far as One Coat Plaster was
concerned, and INR 8,95,900 (Indian Rupees Eight Lakh ninety five
thousand nine hundred) in so far as Shivam Construction Company was
concerned.

Accordingly, both the Operational Creditors served a notice of
demand under Section 8 of the Code on 25 January 2017, at the
registered office of the Corporate Debtor as well as via e-mail.
The Operational Creditors inter alia claimed that they had
not received any payment, much less any response to the demand
notice, till the date of filing of the petition before NCLT PB.

Arguments before the NCLT

While the Operational Creditors demonstrated their case and
supported it with the documents on record, the Corporate Debtor
contended that it had in fact replied to the demand notice dated 4
February 2017 to both the Operational Creditors on 8 February 2017,
stating, inter alia, that due to the poor quality of work
on part of both the Operational Creditors, no further payment could
have been made to them, and that in any event it completely denied
the claim of both the Operational Creditors.

NCLT Order

For ease of reference and to appreciate the controversy at hand,
the relevant extracts from the NCLT PB order are reproduced below,
with emphasis added in bold where necessary:

"...However, in relation to the
balance amount claimed by the petitioners as due from the Company,
we are unable to agree in view of lack of materials submitted
before us by the Petitioners and also taking into
consideration the fact that the debt sought to be fastened on the
company has been vehemently disputed as is evident from the reply
to the notice sent by the Company, which is dated
04.02.2017 but dispatched on 08.02.2017 to the counsel for the
petitioners."...

"Reference to the provisions of
the Code, more particularly Section 9 thereof clearly discloses
that this Tribunal has the power, inter alia also to reject
the Application of the Operational Creditor under Section9(5)(d) in case of notice of dispute has been received by
the operational creditors or there is record of dispute with the
information utility. In the absence of information utility, we are
perforce to rely on the notice of dispute as sent by the Company to
the petitioners denying the liability based on which the entire
edifice of the petitioner's claim crumbles which constitutes
basis of the present application. It is pertinent to note
that the expression 'dispute' has been
defined and it seems to be an inclusive definition
as seen from Section 5(6) of the Code..."

"A bare perusal of Section 5(6)
of the Code shows that a dispute could be proved by showing that a
suit has been filed or arbitration are pending. It further
elaborates that suit or arbitration should be in respect of the
existence of the amount of debt, quality of goods or services; or a
breach of a representation or a warranty. It is not an exhaustive
definition but an illustrative one. It becomes evident from
the expression 'includes' which immediately succeeds the
word 'dispute'. Moreover, under Section8(1) of the Code adequate room has been provided for the
'NCLT' to ascertain the existence of a
dispute...Section8 (2) further clarifies that the
corporate debtor is obliged to bring to the notice of the
'Operational Creditor' within 10 days of the receipt of
notice, the existence of a dispute and record of the
pendency of the suit or arbitration proceeding filed before the
receipt of such notice or invoice in relation to such dispute. The
other option is to pay the demanded amount. In the instant case the
Petitioner sent a demand notice which was duly
received by the 'company' but the reply was also
filed which has been delayed by four days where dispute has been
raised...Hence we are inclined to reject the above
petitions."

Judicial Vagaries – An Analysis

By passing the above directions, which, in our view seem to be
tad glib, the NCLT PB seemed to have opened a Pandora's box
with respect to the implementation of the Code. Given the clear
mandate, object and purpose of the Code, certain relevant questions
are itemised below:

Whether definition of 'dispute' under the Code can be
said to inclusive?

At the outset, Section 5(6) of the Code gives a very restrictive
meaning to a 'dispute' by defining it to
'include a suit or arbitration proceedings relating to
– (a)the existence of the amount of the debt;
(b)the quality of the goods or service; or (c)the breach of a representation or warranty'. Upon
perusal of this definition, the legislative intent is clear in
limiting the scope of the term 'dispute', to only
mean the pendency of a proceeding, be it either a suit or an
arbitration, in the manner discussed above.

Having said the above, even if it is argued that the definition
of 'dispute' under the Code can be said to be
inclusive, it cannot extend to a situation of mere denial of the
claim. By extending the settled principle of ejusdem
generis, it appears to be clear that the word
'includes' can, at best, be extended only to any
pending legal proceedings other than a pending suit or arbitration
proceedings.

In this regard, the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Godfrey Phillips India Limited v State of UP
[Ref: (2005) 2 SCC 515] is relevant. The constitutional
bench of the Supreme Court observed that 'where two or more
words susceptible of analogous meaning are clubbed together, they
are understood to be used in their cognate sense. They take, as it
were, their colour from and are qualified by each other, the
meaning of the general word being restricted to a sense analogous
to that of less general.'

Whether NCLT has the discretion to ascertain the veracity of a
'dispute' at the time of adjudicating an application under
Section 9 of the Code?

Section 8 of the Code entitles an operational creditor, upon
occurrence of a default (i.e., non-payment of debt, when it has
become due and payable) to issue a demand notice in the manner
prescribed therein, to a corporate debtor, which can be followed by
filing an application before NCLT in terms of Section 9 of the
Code. Once the said application is filed, NCLT, in terms of Section
9(5) of the Code, can exercise only one of the two options within a
timebound period of 14 (fourteen) days of such filing, (i.e.,
either admit the application or reject the application by way of an
order in the clearly prescribed manner provided in Section 9(5)(i)
and Section 9(5)(ii) of the Code respectively).

Upon a perusal of the grounds (either for admission or
rejection) under Section 9 of the Code, it is evident that the Code
does not envisage any discretion upon NCLT to ascertain the
veracity of a dispute (i.e., whether the dispute raised is genuine
or not), since the Code has given a very clear and unambiguous
meaning to the term 'dispute', thereby rendering
the interpretation extremely objective and contextual.

Having said the above, the powers, scope and limit of
adjudication under Section 9 are apparent from a perusal of Section
9(5) of the Code as the same uses the word
'shall', thereby indicating the legislative intent
to require NCLT to (a) necessarily decide an application within 14
(Fourteen) days of it being filed by means of an order; (b) while
deciding, either admit an application or reject an application on
the limited five grounds available to NCLT under Section 9(5)(i) or
Section 9(5)(ii) of the Code respectively.

It is relevant to state here that the Supreme Court in the case
of Super Cassettes Industries Limited v Music Broadcast Private
Limited [Ref: (2012) 5 SC 488], stated "...as has
been held by this Court in innumerable cases, a tribunal is a
creature of the statute and can exercise only such powers as are
vested in it by the statute."

What is the meaning of 'notice of dispute'? Whether a
reply under Section 8(2) of the Code simply denying a claim in a
demand notice can be considered for rejecting an Application under
Section 9 of the Code? What is the sanctity of the time frame
envisaged in Section 8(2) of the Code?

Though 'notice of dispute' has not been defined
in the Code, it cannot be extended to mean a mere notice, inter
alia, denying the claim. Any denial to a demand notice must
necessarily raise a 'dispute' in terms of Section
5(6) of the Code. Thus, a mere reply simply denying a claim made in
the demand notice cannot be considered for rejecting an application
under Section 9 of the Code.

Further, Section 8(2) of the Code provides that a notice of
dispute, if any, to a demand notice must be within a period of 10
(ten) days from its receipt. The question which remains to be
addressed and analysed is whether the period of 10 (ten) days, as
provided for in Section 9, includes "non-working days"
and "gazetted holidays".

Khaitan Comment

The context of the term 'dispute', as referred
in the Code, ought to be given a plain and literal meaning, as
envisaged in the Code. A failure to do so would give errant
corporate debtor(s) an opportunity to bypass the purpose, object
and scheme of the Code. Interestingly, post the passing of the
order by NCLT PB on 1 March, 2017, two judgments with divergent
views have been passed on this issue, (i) NCLT Mumbai Bench, on 6
March, 2017, in the case of Essar Projects India Ltd v MCL
Global Steel Pvt Ltd., while interpreting the term
'dispute', held that merely denying a claim in reply to a
demand notice, could not be treated as 'dispute in
existence' for the purposes of rejecting an application
under Section 9 of the Code; and (ii) NCLT PB, in its recent
judgment on 24 March 2017 in the case of Annapurna
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v Soril Infra Resources
Ltd., has expanded the scope of term
'dispute' by holding that a corporate debtor is
well within its right to reject a demand on any sustainable
grounds, which is to be determined on a fact to fact basis.

Having said this, it is yet to be seen as to which of the
interpretations would eventually prevail, if challenged. However,
as of today, the Code seems to have already become a victim of
judicial vagaries, given the fact that two different benches of
NCLT have rendered divergent interpretations on the same issue.

The content of this document do not necessarily reflect the
views/position of Khaitan & Co but remain solely those of the
author(s). For any further queries or follow up please contact
Khaitan & Co at legalalerts@khaitanco.com

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

What is the scope and ambit of the terms "dispute" and "existence of dispute" for determining the maintainability of an application filed by an Operational Creditor under Section 9 read with section 5 and 8 of the I&B Code?

This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).

Email Address

Company Name

Password

Confirm Password

Position

Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests

Accounting

Anti-trust

Commercial

Compliance

Consumer

Criminal

Employment

Energy

Environment

Family

Finance

Government

Healthcare

Immigration

Insolvency

Insurance

International

IP

Law Performance

Law Practice

Litigation

Media & IT

Privacy

Real Estate

Strategy

Tax

Technology

Transport

Wealth Mgt

Regions

Africa

Asia

Asia Pacific

Australasia

Canada

Caribbean

Europe

European Union

Latin America

Middle East

U.K.

United States

Worldwide Updates

Check to state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you
are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its
terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement
to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use
of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq
Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to
read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may
not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative
works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the
Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms &
conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use
electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s
content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products
which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the
suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics
published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related
graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or
its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with
regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of
merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement.
In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any
special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting
from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence
or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or
performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include
technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added
to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make
improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described
herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally
identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for
three primary purposes:

To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.

To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a
colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third
parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information
providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their
articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and
services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out
by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and
services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to
view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our
users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can
customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware'
functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately.
This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to
our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting
articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for
registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate
sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the
pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us
(e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who
author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than
the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us
not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above
or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the
Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via
email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when
they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no
disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate
registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and
topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it.
Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page
and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their
personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an
identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information
about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they
use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the
Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to
personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information
specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and
cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function
unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are
disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the
information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned
about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to
expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option
as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example,
advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we
are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement,
and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not
linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or
its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other
sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read
the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement
applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or
contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and
the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information
requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name
and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age
level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes.
Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the
functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our
site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this
information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq,
but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to
request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’
information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your
information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you
have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to
webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode),
or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way
to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can
usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will
post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information
we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it.
If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner
different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by
way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their
information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with
the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these
principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use
commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.